Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/3447/2000 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3447 of 2000
=========================================================
VICTORIA
JUBILEE MADRESSA & 1 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
SHERVANI
AYUBKHAN ASINKHAN & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
M/S.VYAS
ASSOCIATES for
Petitioner(s) : 1 - 2.
MR AY KOGJE for Respondent(s) : 1,
RULE
SERVED for Respondent(s) :
2,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
Date
: 23/04/2010
ORAL
ORDER
1. The
order impugned in the present petition is order dated 16th
February 2000 passed by the Gujarat Primary Education Tribunal,
Ahmedabad in Application No.243 of 1994.
2. On
7th April 2010 this court passed the following order:
With
a view to enable the learned counsel for the petitioner to take
necessary instructions, S.O. to 23.04.2010 .
3. Today
none appears for the petitioner.
4. The
petitioner Trust is running the petitioner no.2 school. The
respondent no.1 was working as Assistant Teacher since 22nd
January 1979 in the said school. A show-cause notice was issued to
respondent no.1 on 14th October 1994 and thereafter the
services of the respondent no.1 came to be terminated. The respondent
no.1 filed Application No.243 of 1994 before Gujarat Primary
Education Tribunal challenging the termination order. The Tribunal by
order dated 16th February 2000 allowed the said
application and directed the petitioners to reinstate the respondent
no.1 and to pay him the difference of pay . It is the said order
which is under challenge in this petition.
5. The
averments in the petition disclose that the petitioner no.1 Trust is
running a minority school and therefore such an order ought not to
have been passed; that the school is run without the financial aid;
that it is exempted from the provisions of the Primary Education Act;
that there were serious allegations against the respondent no.1 and
that the respondent no.1 has not replied to the show cause notice and
therefore the termination was just and proper. According to him the
provisions of the Primary Education Act would not be attracted to the
facts of the present case.
6. On
perusal of the record it is found that the finding of the Tribunal is
that the service respondent no.1 was terminated without following
proper procedure. The Tribunal has also considered the fact that at
the time of appointing the respondent no.1 on 24.1.1974 his basic pay
was Rs.49/- which was later on Rs.1492/-. The pay was not paid in
accordance with law. Even if the school is a minority school, it does
not give a licence to give lesser pay and termination without
following proper procedure. I am therefore in complete agreement
with the reasonings adopted and findings arrived at by the learned
Tribunal. No case is made out. The petition is, therefore, dismissed.
Rule is discharged with no order as to costs.
(K.S.
Jhaveri,J.)
mary//
Top